Oliver Fromme o...@lurza.secnetix.de writes:
Basically, from a security point of view, running EOLed versions of
FreeBSD is not a very good idea. Given the fact that the EOL
deadlines are announced long in advance, and the fact that updating
FreeBSD is quite easy (either via source or via
On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 8:28 PM, Mike Hernandez sequet...@gmail.com wrote:
I understand that some systems can't afford downtime for an upgrade, but
why not upgrade? A few minutes of uptime to take advantage of the hard
work that the developers poured into making another release can't be a
bad
Dag-Erling Smørgrav d...@des.no wrote:
Oliver Fromme o...@lurza.secnetix.de writes:
Basically, from a security point of view, running EOLed versions of
FreeBSD is not a very good idea. Given the fact that the EOL
deadlines are announced long in advance, and the fact that updating
Pete Ehlke p...@rfc822.net wrote:
Suppose I have a decent sized installation of 2000 machines, and they've
been running SomeOS v4.1 for three years. That's over 2 Million machine-days
of production experience I have with SomeOS v4.1. Sure, there are bugs,
there are behaviors that may not
right now, all i want to know is:
q: will 6.4 be the_last_of_the_sixes ?
or
q: now that it is nearly six months after_the_fact,
is there, still, a non_zero probability that
we will celebrate a blessed event named 6.5 ?
rob
Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
Oliver
On Mon, May 04, 2009 at 05:58:22PM -0700, Jason C. Wells wrote:
That should be read as End of Life is meaningless. Not end of Life is
Meaningless. Life is still meaningless, as is this post if you disagree.
It mystifies me that there is this recent tendency for people to get
concerned
You already know your answer:
Every one of our SunE10K's, E6500's, and i think now our E4900's are EOL,
according to Sun :), but we keep them running ship-shape(updates et all) and
they have paid for themselves over n over again.
However, we have a (mirrored) Development department that